On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: >>> makes a bridge between two fields, >> >> >> What two fields? >> > > The study of the notion of truth, (epistemology, philosophy, > metaphysics, it is interdisciplinary) and theology. >
Translation from the original bafflegab: The truth is important. And by the way, there is no field of theology, it has nothing intelligent to say because it has not discovered any facts. > Plato's questions are at the origin of science. > But Plato lived 2500 years ago and we are no longer at the origin of science, it's time to move on. > It is no use to say more if you don't have read it, and don't want to get > informed. > I didn't say I haven't read Plato, I said I knew more philosophy than he did, a lot more. > > > Making you defending Aristotle theology, confusing it with the physical > science. > There is no doubt that somebody around here is confused because I have said more than once that Aristotle was the worst physicist who ever lived. Even his reputation as a great logician is overstated, he used some very intricate pure logic and concluded with certainty that women MUST have fewer teeth than men. They don't. Aristotle had a wife, he could have counted her teeth at any time but never bothered to because like most philosophers he already knew the truth, or thought he did. > I have never seen a paper in physics assuming a primitive physical > reality, still less a paper showing how to test such idea. > I have no idea what you mean but I will say this, if you have never seen a physics paper even attempt to do something then its probably not very important because they've attempted some pretty wacky things. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
